Right now there aren't a lot of applications that utilize quad core technology. In my personal opinion, if you are looking at gaming I would go with a faster dual core as opposed to a slower quad core. Now in about 5 years when games are optimized for quad core gaming, I would suggest switching. It's just too expense for a good quad core right now.
I'd go with the Intel E8500 right now. Best chip you can get, easy to OC and runs cool.
Right now there aren't a lot of applications that utilize quad core technology. In my personal opinion, if you are looking at gaming I would go with a faster dual core as opposed to a slower quad core. Now in about 5 years when games are optimized for quad core gaming, I would suggest switching. It's just too expense for a good quad core right now. I'd go with the Intel E8500 right now. Best chip you can get, easy to OC and runs cool.
Yes it very much depends on what you're doing. Primarily most games don't make use of quad core technology, and it's doubtful that they will anytime soon. But a quad core system is primarily made for Multitasking.
Running 4 major programs on a quad core would run more efficiently then running 4 on a dual core.
Say your job is to move rocks from one side of the room to another.
When you have a dual core system you basically have 2 people moving those rocks. You can have a stronger person moving them (higher hz) and move them quicker,
Or you could have 4 people moving them.
The point of more cores rather then higher Hz was because you can't see a difference as much between 3 ghz and 3.5 ghz.
Yes its faster, but would you rather have 2 people moving rocks at 3X speed or 4 people moving rocks at 2X speed?
So again it really depends on what you're trying to accomplish.
ok well i know one processor has 2 and the other 4 but, i was wondering is there any use for a Quad .... if i find a processor that is a duo that runs at 3.0 and a quad that runs at 2.6 the duo is faster right?
short answer. yes
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
Comments
Right now there aren't a lot of applications that utilize quad core technology. In my personal opinion, if you are looking at gaming I would go with a faster dual core as opposed to a slower quad core. Now in about 5 years when games are optimized for quad core gaming, I would suggest switching. It's just too expense for a good quad core right now.
I'd go with the Intel E8500 right now. Best chip you can get, easy to OC and runs cool.
Running 4 major programs on a quad core would run more efficiently then running 4 on a dual core.
Say your job is to move rocks from one side of the room to another.
When you have a dual core system you basically have 2 people moving those rocks. You can have a stronger person moving them (higher hz) and move them quicker,
Or you could have 4 people moving them.
The point of more cores rather then higher Hz was because you can't see a difference as much between 3 ghz and 3.5 ghz.
Yes its faster, but would you rather have 2 people moving rocks at 3X speed or 4 people moving rocks at 2X speed?
So again it really depends on what you're trying to accomplish.
short answer. yes
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a robot foot stomping on a human face -- forever."
Say a Q6600 which comes as 2.4ghz (Quad) just overclock it to something like 3.4 ghz then you're sorted.
(\ /) ?
( . .)
c('')('')